After Rio+20, developing countries must take the lead

Last week's summit has confirmed that sustainable development will only be achieved through the political leadership of developing countries.

Two and a half years ago, the Copenhagen climate change conference (COP15) ended in rancorous and highly public disagreement between developed and developing nations on what was needed to prevent further global warming.

The outcome proved an intense embarrassment to the host nation, Denmark.

From the beginning of negotiations over the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (dubbed Rio+20), which took place in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, last week, it was widely reported that the Brazilian government was desperate to avoid the same fate.

Although Brazil's determination was only one contributory factor, the result was the agreement, by all 188 participating nations, on an outcome document that was filled with aspirations and exhortations about the need for the world to move to a more sustainable path of economic and social development, but lacking any firm commitment to the more painful steps needed to achieve this goal.

Inevitably, this outcome has satisfied virtually no-one engaged in the process (apart from the host country).

But the increased focus that it provided on the political realities on which the Copenhagen meeting foundered — and which Rio+20 ducked — has itself been a significant step forward.

Taking the lead

What became clearer than ever at Rio was that the key to global sustainable development does not lie in the logical arguments coming from proponents in the developed world, including its scientific communities, however passionately they are delivered.

Rather, it now lies in the combination of political muscle and imaginative thinking in the developing world, particularly the so-called 'emerging economies' of countries such as Brazil, China and India.

In Rio, these countries insisted, quite legitimately, that a global commitment to making the transition to 'green economies' is only valid if it includes a transfer of significant financial and technical resources from the North to the South.

Their argument was that such a transfer would compensate for the fact that this transition is necessary because of the consumption patterns of the North.

Furthermore, the emerging economies — and China in particular — are coming to realise that sustainable development is in their own interest.

At the same time, a combination of technical ingenuity and low labour costs makes them well placed to become the leading producers of sustainable technologies for the rest of the world­ — as China has already shown in exporting solar energy technologies to Africa, for example.

In particular, by the end of the meeting, more than 700 pledges — valued at over US$500 billion — had been registered for concrete actions through, for example, individual institutional commitments or partnership agreements.

Each of these was required to commit to quantifiable outcomes within a fixed timeframe. Together they show that a massive global commitment to sustainable development already exists, even without promises of resource transfers from political leaders.

Indeed, this outcome appears to confirm what many have been arguing: that truly sustainable economies can only be built from the grassroots, and with the full inclusion of community groups and other interested stakeholders.

Reigning in corporate power

But even if grassroots or voluntary initiatives are a necessary condition for sustainable development, they are not sufficient.

In particular, it ignores the extent to which the key directions and components of economic growth — such as a continued reliance on non-renewable energy sources supported by generous subsidies — are inevitably set at the top, rather than the bottom, of the political pyramid.

Furthermore, without an all-embracing political framework to ensure coherence between individual actions, each stakeholder remains — equally inevitably — motivated primarily by their own self-interest (or that of their stakeholders or shareholders), rather than a commitment to a common good.

For example, many of the 700 individual pledges registered at Rio involved individual commitments from corporations keen to be seen to be 'going green'.

Ironically, however, former Norwegian Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundlandt, head of the Brundlandt Commission, which first coined the phrase 'sustainable development' in the 1980s, accused corporate lobbyists of being partly responsible for the disappointing outcome of the formal negotiations. [1]

Paving the future

The scientific meetings held in the run-up to Rio+20 — including both the Planet Under Pressure meeting in London in April, and the International Council for Science and UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization's Forum on Science, Technology and Innovation for Sustainable Development, held two weeks ago in Rio itself — both underlined the urgency of taking action on many fronts.

Rio+20 opened the door for action on some of these, such as protecting the marine environment or mountain ecosystems. It also endorsed closer interaction between scientific communities and policymakers — another essential element of any future strategy.

But the meeting also highlighted the political challenge of changing the course of a global economy still wedded largely to fossil fuels and non-sustainable patterns of consumption.

It also showed that the developed world lacks the commitment to make the necessary changes and accept the painful consequences, pursuing the familiar maxim that 'turkeys don't vote for Christmas'.

It is now up to the developing world and its emerging economies to show that they can do better — for example, by taking on a key role in defining the forthcoming Sustainable Development Goals — and providing the political muscle to make this happen.

Concerns about embarrassment over possible failure should not stop them from taking the necessary political risks.

David DicksonEditor, SciDev.Net

Most popular related searches

Related articles

Overly optimistic reports of renewables’ success are not only misleading but also counterproductive
In the wake of the 2016 presidential election, the proliferation of misinformation on social media is finally getting the attention it deserves. Or so I thought.
Scrolling through my Facebook news feed recently, I stumbled upon an article shared by Climate Central, a nonprofit news organization focused on climate science. “The World’s Renewable Energy Capacity Now Beats Out Coal,” read...

Introduction
Given the United States’ recent election results, America’s future on climate and energy policy is uncertain, but global progress on mitigating climate change will continue with or without us. We have reason to be optimistic because countries around the world have demonstrated their commitments to taking action on global warming. Already, 114 countries have ratified the Paris Climate Change Agreement, which became international law on November 4, 2016, indicating that mitigating climate...

Climate changes, as one of the biggest threats to a global food security, highly influence natural resources that are essential for crop production. Farming is not only affected by the impact of climate changes, but it’s also a significant contributor to global greenhouse gas emissions. Intensive farm practices that include both farm production and change of land use, directly affect the global carbon, water, and nutrient cycles.
Farming, as a direct driver for 80% of global deforestation, also releases...

Introduction
To meet the demands of a growing, increasingly urban global population (approximately 9 billion by 2050), the World Bank calculates that global food production must increase by 70% in the next 35 years. This is a great challenge not only because of the volume of food that must be produced, but because agricultural conditions will not remain constant or predicable in the years to come.
It is still unclear how and to what extent climate change will affect agricultural conditions. Some regions might...

With the Government now having officially announced its support for a new runway at Heathrow, despite having slashed the Airports Commission’s claim of a £147 billion benefit to the UK by almost 60% (referring instead to a benefit over sixty years of ‘up to £61 billion’), we take a first look at what they have to offer in terms of answers to some key environmental challenges.
Climate Change
As AEF has consistently pointed out, and as the Committee on Climate Change reminded Governmen...

Customer comments

No comments were found for After Rio+20, developing countries must take the lead. Be the first to comment!

Add your comment

Great! comment successfully added!

Contact

Your message:

Your email

Your first name

Your last name

I would like to receive periodic email updates and special offers from select suppliers.